Epidemiology and Health Care of Generalized Pustular Psoriasis in Germany – Methodology and Outcomes of Claims Data Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Kristina Hagenström, Katharina Müller, Nesrine Ben-Anaya, Matthias Augustin Institute for Health Services Research in Dermatology and Nursing (IVDP), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Hamburg, GermanyCorrespondence: Kristina Hagenström, Institute for Health Services Research in Dermatology and Nursing (IVDP), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Martinistraße 52, Hamburg, 20246, Germany, Tel +49 40 741059513, Fax +49 40 74105534, Email k.hagenstroem@uke.dePurpose: Epidemiological and health care data on generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) show large differences in literature. This study assessed GPP epidemiology, comorbidities and health care in Germany.Patients and Methods: Nationwide population-related German claims data were analyzed using different case definitions for internal validation.Results: In 2019, the prevalence of GPP in Germany in adults ranged from 8 to 39 and incidence from 1 to 15 persons per 100,000. Prevalence was higher in women and increased with age. Thirty-three percent had at least one other psoriatic ICD-10 code. People with GPP had significantly more skin diseases as well as cardiovascular and mental diseases than persons without psoriasis/GPP. The average annual drug costs per capita were € 2050 and were highest in those receiving biologicals (€ 15,524). Marked differences in treatment by specialist were observed.Conclusion: Acknowledging that the observed frequency or costs associated with GPP may be underestimated due to a few inherent limitations is important. Differences in GPP coding behavior and diagnostic accuracy may contribute to variations in epidemiology. The high disease burden is reflected by high annual costs and by significant comorbidity.Plain Language Summary: Generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) is a severe form of psoriasis that causes painful, pus-filled blisters on the skin. Our study, conducted in Germany, aimed to explore how common GPP is, what other health problems people with GPP experience, and how they are treated. We analyzed health insurance data from across the country, using various methods to ensure our findings were accurate.We found that GPP is a rare condition compared to other types of psoriasis, affecting between 8 and 39 adults per 100,000 people in Germany in 2019. The number of people with GPP varied, with new cases ranging from 1 to 15 per 100,000 people. GPP was more common in women and increased with age. In addition, about a third of people with GPP also had other types of psoriasis. People with GPP had more skin diseases, heart problems, and mental health problems than people without psoriasis. The average annual cost of treating GPP was € 2050 per person, but this amount could be as high as € 15,524 for those receiving advanced treatments known as biologics. We also saw significant differences in how GPP is treated depending on which specialist was involved.In conclusion, our study highlights that GPP is a costly condition with a high burden of additional health problems. Variations in how GPP is diagnosed and coded might explain differences in reported prevalence and costs. Improving diagnostic accuracy and treatment approaches could lead to better care and reduced expenses for patients.Keywords: prevalence, incidence, frequency of illness, statutory health insurance data, validation
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,011 | 0,021 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».